Do you think the United Nations should remove veto or choose a different way ?
- Thread starter John Muff
- Start date
The idea of the UN is great, the execution of the idea is a bit flawed. I always thought that Canada should have a veto on security council. During WWII we had 3rd largest navy in the world, and beach of our own on D-day. We did as much to defeat National Socialism as any one and more than most. We invented peacekeeping. We have never lost a war. We are a truly globally thinking country and would be a rational voice of reason. Maybe we should move the UN to Canada where it would be appreciated.
Remove the veto power and say goodbye to the UN.
There is no reason for the big powers to be a part of it otherwise. If the US ain't a part of it, it doesn't much matter. And if China or Britain (but not France) left, then it would become an irrelevancy.
Canada doesn't deserve a veto. It is not important enough.
There is no reason for the big powers to be a part of it otherwise. If the US ain't a part of it, it doesn't much matter. And if China or Britain (but not France) left, then it would become an irrelevancy.
Canada doesn't deserve a veto. It is not important enough.
And France is? :laughing7:
Just kidding, I think I already know the answer to that question....
There is so much antipathy in the U.S. towards the UN, it is surprising that it has lasted as long as it has. The U.S. doesn't like to be part of anything that they can't completely control and run to their own advantage. The League of Nations was invented by the U.S. and thern they refused to join. Any UN motion to get rid of the veto, will be vetoed. The UN has to be shut down while a new one is built. It would be very difficult because the U.S., and the other veto holders would fight it every step of the way.
The United Nations has reduced its veracity to a group of used car dealers - certainly overlooking the original charge that they be concerned as one for all - now they are concerned with what they can get out of the entity for their own - to be exaulted and elevated when they return from their U.N. scam
That's not anecdotal - that is fact. It is not something born of writing and reading forums - it is accurate reportage of their activities, or lack thereof and agendas which have very little positive unless they see the dollar sign at the long yellow brick road they travel - made up of deception and obfuscation and shed blood.
For example - when we have billions of people around our globe in horrendous poverty, ruled by insane dictators who are friends of the U.N., living less than animals - where is the help being driven by the U.N.? What success has the U.N. given you to date?
In contrast...
For example over the past five years a drive within the U.N. has been going on to upgrade and remodel the current U.N. building as it is reaching "dangerous levels of malfunction". I hesitate to compare those royal offices with some hovels in Darfur - but I digress.
Trump years ago offered a bid to the U.N. to remediate, install newer systems, and generally bring the U.N. building up to acceptable and current code for the City of New York and surrounding communities - as his own buildings are constructed according to N.Y. code and are necessarily mandated. Trump may be a blow hard but he knows his real estate - he isn't wealthy because he has funny hair and marries tall women. He has actually met with Annan, gone through with his staff of engineers and construction experts in all phases of building renewal.
Trump's bid was originally 700 million - a princely sum when most of the people in touch with the U.N. scams want the place disbanded by this group of displaced carpetbaggers and moved to another nation who can afford to keep them in the luxury they have become accustomed to. Trump has figures of newer buildings - created from scratch which are healthier, more efficient and larger than the U.N. building - which have been constructed for far less. Remediation or remodel apparently is more expensive than new. (Can you imagine carting away the trash?) (In New York?)
The offer was refused and other bids were put out to notable to friends of the U.N. - and the amount grew until one of the latest numbers last year was approximately 1.9 Billion .... that number has now risen to 3.5 Billion.... and growing.
Annan wishes a new United Nations Building as his last monument for all his "good works" done for the people of the world in that building. Kofi's Monument should be the graves in Africa, or Iraq or all of the other nations ruled by despots while Kofi "took lunch and meetings".
Edit: And my point about the revitalized U.N. Building is this: How dare Annan demand funds of that magnitude when that kind of money could do so much for the missions the U.N. was originally created to accomplis?
When does this insanity stop? It's your money folks....
The U.N. not only needs a new "house" to be rebuilt - the concept of the U.N. needs immediate surgery and the cancer within removed for a new life to thrive for the benefit of all who contribute and believe in its true good for all the peoples of our world both rich and poor. The concept was so futuristic when it was created - that it would bring a kind and gentle peace of reign over all peoples of our globe - and it has become yet another kingdom for anarchists and thieves who drain all that is beautiful and possible in our world.
As for the poll above regarding removal of the veto....rather I would prefer the U.N. be removed entirely.
The option was not available.
That's not anecdotal - that is fact. It is not something born of writing and reading forums - it is accurate reportage of their activities, or lack thereof and agendas which have very little positive unless they see the dollar sign at the long yellow brick road they travel - made up of deception and obfuscation and shed blood.
For example - when we have billions of people around our globe in horrendous poverty, ruled by insane dictators who are friends of the U.N., living less than animals - where is the help being driven by the U.N.? What success has the U.N. given you to date?
In contrast...
For example over the past five years a drive within the U.N. has been going on to upgrade and remodel the current U.N. building as it is reaching "dangerous levels of malfunction". I hesitate to compare those royal offices with some hovels in Darfur - but I digress.
Trump years ago offered a bid to the U.N. to remediate, install newer systems, and generally bring the U.N. building up to acceptable and current code for the City of New York and surrounding communities - as his own buildings are constructed according to N.Y. code and are necessarily mandated. Trump may be a blow hard but he knows his real estate - he isn't wealthy because he has funny hair and marries tall women. He has actually met with Annan, gone through with his staff of engineers and construction experts in all phases of building renewal.
Trump's bid was originally 700 million - a princely sum when most of the people in touch with the U.N. scams want the place disbanded by this group of displaced carpetbaggers and moved to another nation who can afford to keep them in the luxury they have become accustomed to. Trump has figures of newer buildings - created from scratch which are healthier, more efficient and larger than the U.N. building - which have been constructed for far less. Remediation or remodel apparently is more expensive than new. (Can you imagine carting away the trash?) (In New York?)
The offer was refused and other bids were put out to notable to friends of the U.N. - and the amount grew until one of the latest numbers last year was approximately 1.9 Billion .... that number has now risen to 3.5 Billion.... and growing.
Annan wishes a new United Nations Building as his last monument for all his "good works" done for the people of the world in that building. Kofi's Monument should be the graves in Africa, or Iraq or all of the other nations ruled by despots while Kofi "took lunch and meetings".
Edit: And my point about the revitalized U.N. Building is this: How dare Annan demand funds of that magnitude when that kind of money could do so much for the missions the U.N. was originally created to accomplis?
When does this insanity stop? It's your money folks....
The U.N. not only needs a new "house" to be rebuilt - the concept of the U.N. needs immediate surgery and the cancer within removed for a new life to thrive for the benefit of all who contribute and believe in its true good for all the peoples of our world both rich and poor. The concept was so futuristic when it was created - that it would bring a kind and gentle peace of reign over all peoples of our globe - and it has become yet another kingdom for anarchists and thieves who drain all that is beautiful and possible in our world.
As for the poll above regarding removal of the veto....rather I would prefer the U.N. be removed entirely.
The option was not available.
Last edited:
Of course the veto should be removed. But there are a lot of other changes that should be made as well. Only free, democratic nations should have a vote at the U.N.. Military dictatorships, theocracies etc... are accountable to no one and do not deserve a say in such a forum. While these countries should be allowed membership and a say, the vote should not be granted until democratic reforms are implemented.
--L.
So let me get this right Logic, because your sentences are hard to figure out, are you suggesting that the United Nations fail to represent the world by denying some countries? and where are you located anyway?
Our free world is a result of winning world wars for freedom, and these countries are responsible for establishing the freedom and ability of living a life in which we are not picked up on the street and thrown into some jail, work camp or concentration camp...
So where exactly are you located? I have this feeling you are from the middle-east, since your comments have nothing but ill-feeling for everything our country stands for.